Wide GRC suite, or deep resilience platform?
If you need claims, audit, ESG, ERM and BCM in one place, Riskonnect is excellent. If you need incident command, Business Impact Assessments, Resilience Plans, vendor risk and exercises to actually work as one operational loop, AirTee.ai is built for that. Most enterprises end up running both.
They solve different problems. Most enterprises run both.
Riskonnect is an enterprise GRC suite. Its centre of gravity is the risk register, with adjacent modules for audit, claims, ESG, third-party assurance and policy management. The BCM module sits inside that wider product line, and was historically built around the document-cycle era of business continuity — annual BIAs, signed-off BCPs, scheduled exercises.
AirTee.ai is an integrated resilience platform. It does one thing: it runs the operational resilience loop end-to-end — Business Impact Assessment, Resilience Plans, vendor and supply-chain risk, exercises, live incident command, and AI After-Action — as a single workspace where the artefacts update each other. It does not do enterprise audit, claims, or ESG, and it never will.
The right way to choose is not "which platform wins" but "where does the resilience loop need to live?" If you want the loop inside a wider GRC suite as one module among many, Riskonnect's BCM module is competent and integrated. If you want the loop to be the product — built for the people who run incidents at 03:00, not for the people who write the policy at 11:00 — AirTee is the only platform with that focus.
Side-by-side, by capability.
Honest scoring. Where Riskonnect is genuinely strong (audit, claims, ERM), we don't compete. Where AirTee is the only one that ships the capability, we say so.
| Capability | Riskonnect | AirTee.ai |
|---|---|---|
Operational resilience scope BCM + IR + Exercises | ◐One module among many | ●Entire platform purpose |
Live incident command | ○No | ●AI-augmented commander surface |
Living BIA / Resilience Plans | ◐Form-driven cycles | ●Updates from live telemetry |
AI After-Action drafting | ○No | ●<30s with control mapping |
Enterprise risk register | ●Core strength | ◐Resilience-scoped only |
Internal audit workflow | ●Yes | ○No |
Insurance & claims management | ●Heritage strength | ○No |
ESG reporting | ●Yes | ○No |
Third-party / vendor risk | ●Questionnaire-driven | ●Graph + telemetry-driven |
DORA register & clocks | ◐Hand-maintained register | ●Generated from dependency graph |
Exercises with AI controller | ○No | ●Yes |
Time-to-deploy (single BU) | 3–9 months | 30–60 days |
Three scenarios where Riskonnect is the right primary choice.
- ▍Your enterprise risk function owns the platform decision and the resilience programme is one of several risk domains under one budget.
- ▍You need claims management, internal audit workflow, or ESG reporting in the same tool — these are Riskonnect's heritage strengths and AirTee will never match them.
- ▍Your regulator and operating model still tolerate document-cycle BCM (annual BIA, scheduled exercises, periodic reporting) and you don't need live incident operations.
Three scenarios where AirTee is the right primary choice for resilience.
- ▍You're regulated under DORA, NIS2, PRA SS1/21 or HKMA OR-2 and need the BIA to be a live artefact, not an annual one.
- ▍Your resilience team and your incident response team are the same humans, or sit one Slack channel apart, and you want them on one workspace.
- ▍You want AI After-Action to actually work — drafted from real telemetry, with control updates, not a Word template.
How AirTee + Riskonnect coexist in production.
The most common pattern at large enterprises: Riskonnect remains the GRC system of record (risk register, audit, ESG, claims) and AirTee runs the operational resilience loop. The two platforms are wired together via AirTee's Riskonnect connector.
From AirTee to Riskonnect: every incident, every AAR-derived control update, every exercise outcome, and every BIA divergence flows into the Riskonnect risk register as evidence. Auditors see one source of truth in Riskonnect, with the underlying operational record in AirTee.
From Riskonnect to AirTee: ownership records, asset inventories and policy references stay aligned. AirTee does not duplicate the enterprise risk register — it inherits the part it needs and contributes evidence back. Customers report 60–80% reduction in resilience-related double-keying after the integration is live.
Quick answers
- Is AirTee a GRC tool?
- No. AirTee covers Business Continuity Management, incident command, exercises, vendor and supply-chain risk, and AI After-Action. GRC platforms cover a wider remit (audit, ESG, claims, ERM, policy management) — AirTee is deliberately narrower and deeper on operational resilience.
- Can we run AirTee alongside Riskonnect?
- Yes — and many enterprise customers do. AirTee is the operational resilience platform; Riskonnect is the enterprise GRC backbone. AirTee writes incident outcomes, control updates, and AAR results to Riskonnect via API for enterprise risk reporting.
- What does Riskonnect do that AirTee does not?
- Riskonnect's strengths sit outside the resilience loop: insurance and claims management, ESG reporting, internal audit workflow, enterprise risk register, third-party assurance for procurement. AirTee does not attempt any of these.
- Why not just use the Riskonnect BCM module?
- Riskonnect's BCM module is competent for the document-cycle BCM era. It is not built around live incident operations, AI After-Action, or graph-native dependency mapping. If your regulator now expects continuous resilience evidence (DORA, NIS2, SS1/21), the document cycle is no longer enough.
- How do the platforms talk to each other?
- AirTee ships a Riskonnect connector that posts incidents, AAR outputs, control updates and exercise results into Riskonnect's risk register. The integration is bi-directional for assets and ownership, so both platforms stay aligned without duplicate maintenance.
See AirTee in your environment.
We'll model one of your real scenarios live.